Teacher-targeted, publicly accessible: Anyone can open this URL. Keep it out of learner handouts and collect each child's first response before discussing feedback. These are formative checks, not secure exams. If prior access matters, use a newly authored parallel case. Accept pointing, speech, signing, AAC, drawing and adult-directed placement as equivalent target evidence; note assistance. Do not score a child for declining personal or local disclosure. No real child/classroom result has been collected for this pack.
Day 25 · Window Board
- Positions/source: WIDE TABLE left and LABELLED BASKET right in Source 1 drawing. A model may show broad left/right regions. If a child gives reversed positions, re-anchor the page orientation and ask them to point to the printed labels.
- Notice versus result: Source 2 asks for large drawing cards to go in the basket after use. It does not show anyone complied. If the child reports compliance, ask which source records a person's action; none does.
- Attribution: Fictional Tavi says they use the wide table to sort cards. It is Tavi's statement, not all visitors' view or a verified independent observation. If the child attributes it to the notice, reread the source headings.
- Questions/conclusion: Accept answerable “Where is the basket?” → right (Source 1), “What does the notice ask?” → put cards in basket (Source 2), or “What does Tavi say?” → table for sorting (Source 3). Accept unanswerable “Did anyone put cards away?”, “Did another visitor use the table?” or “Did the arrangement help?” The conclusion must name a source-bound fact and an unknown. Do not require a particular wording.
Next move: If source types blur, make a new three-column DRAWING / NOTICE / VIEW sort with a different fictional case. If a child attributes the three correctly, ask them to create a question for which the archive has no answer. Do not treat this as evidence for a real familiar-place, family or Country/Place outcome.
Day 30 · Colour Panel decision
- Sort/attribute: Source 1 shows one yellow circle and one broad pocket. Source 2 asks that large labels be placed in the pocket after looking. Source 3 is Uma's preference about the yellow circle. Source 4 is Ivo's wish for a second pocket. Accept a child naming one drawn feature and both speaker links; it is not necessary to reproduce the quotes exactly.
- Careful message: A is a possible message consistent with Source 2's instruction. The source supports an idea or request, not a claim that it was followed. B is unsupported: no source shows a second pocket, a completed change, or benefit to everyone. If a child chooses B because “Ivo wants it,” ask whether wanting is the same as seeing a change.
- Wish versus shown feature: Ivo would like a second pocket. Source 1 shows one. This is not a completed change. The sources do not say a second was added or that anyone used one.
- Real-source question/conclusion: Accept “Would people use the pocket?”, “Would the proposed message be accessible?”, “Did labels get returned?” or another specific question that would need a school-approved source or actual observation. A valid conclusion names a printed fact/request/view and an unproven effect; no real outcome is credited.
Next move: If the child confuses a wish with an event, use a new drawing/quote pair and ask them to place “shown,” “asked,” “wished” and “observed” separately. If secure evidence of real place care is a school objective, plan an approved local observation with its own record and cultural/privacy review. A paper check alone does not establish an action-observed outcome or finish K03/K04.
Recording guide
Privately record day, exact child response or pointing location, route/access support, one evidenced strength, one unresolved source distinction, and one next practice. Keep under school policy. Do not publish child work or personal/local details in SubjectNest.